Coronavirus research before 2020 is more relevant than ever, especially when interpreted for Covid-19

Bibliographic Data

ID21255927
AuthorsMike Thelwall (0000-0001-6065-205X, University of Wolverhampton, corresponding author)
Year2020
Volume1
Issue4
Pages1381-1395
Publication date2020-12-01
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenueQuantitative Science Studies (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 2641-3337 • E-ISSN: 2641-3337
PublisherMIT Press (PUBLISHER • US)
DOI10.1162/qss_a_00083
OpenAlexW3056190832
LanguageEN
Citations received2
References cited22

The speed with which biomedical specialists were able to identify and characterize COVID-19 was partly due to prior research with other coronaviruses. Early epidemiological comparisons with Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS) and Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS), also made it easier to predict COVID-19’s likely spread and lethality. This article assesses whether academic interest in prior coronavirus research has translated into interest in the primary source material, using Mendeley reader counts for early academic impact evidence. The results confirm that SARS and MERS research in 2008–2017 experienced anomalously high increases in Mendeley readers in April–May 2020. Nevertheless, studies learning COVID-19 lessons from SARS and MERS or using them as a benchmark for COVID-19 have generated much more academic interest than primary studies of SARS or MERS. Thus, research that interprets prior relevant research for new diseases when they are discovered seems to be particularly important to help researchers to understand its implications in the new context

2019-20 coronavirus outbreak · Coronavirus · Coronavirus Infections · Middle East respiratory syndrome · Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus · Outbreak · Pathology · COVID-19 Clinical Research Studies · COVID-19 epidemiological studies · History · Medicine · SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 Research · Virology

Tools

Open DOIOpen Access